GY!BE Mafia [E.N.D.]

[Golden]

SO CLASSES ARE FINALLLLY DONE!

Congrats sig!

[sig]

Linki: Why do you say he is always like this when good? Not sure what you mean here.

Sig has a knack for making himself look terribly scummy even when he isn't, I've seen him be lynched a fair few times now when civ for similar things.

That's not to say he MUST be good, just that I think more work is needed to figure out what is going on with him.

Yeah I seem to remember you leading those lynches a few time.

:P

[sig]

Also moving over to boom I don't like the case on Wilgy or Mp's last minute switch

But...You Don't See the Case on Boomslang............................Your Words

That's my point.

CFD sig

No CFDs are evil

Sig looks scummy as all fuck therefore sig is good.

Sadly, this is probably true. I cannot read this man.

Also moving over to boom I don't like the case on Wilgy or Mp's last minute switch

Crown of shit

Yeah, this. I would be shocked if sig wasn't bad at this point.[/quote]

Yeah, this. I would be shocked if sig wasn't bad at this point.

Except sig is always like this when good, so how do ever know with him?

I think you need to look past face value scumminess and look for motivations.

So, here's what I've got so far...

He was ok voting for boom, despite not really seeing the case, but not if it tied the votes.

Sig - it looks like you wanted your vote to be on one of the big wagons (even if you didn't agree with the case), but not to actually risk counting. Why did you not want to tie the votes? Why were you happy voting boomslang when you only left him a vote behind?

Anyone else - what's the baddie motivation for this from sig? Just to look like his vote mattered? But even a cursory iso would tell you how it actually went down...

I would say in general when I'm lynched as a civ it is more of my own fault and looking messy, at this point the main issue i've had his falling behind and then only being around near the end of the phase. So I wouldn't agree that, while this does fit with the meta if sig looks super scummy for dumb reasons he is a civ, idea it isn't the main reason I look scummy. While the people suspecting me are wrong, the main issue I at least see why they suspect me is because I've been more inactive and when I do come on and post it is at bad times. I believe given the opportunity to post more I'll elevate the suspicion agaisnt me. If not then we can fall back to the meta argument

tinfoil hat time! I'm on a mafia team with Golden and he is stopping me from getting lynched. Vote Sig

Basically, Boom was not around to defend himself. Sig was. And sig chose to ignore any questions directed at him. That's why I currently lean more bad on sig than on Boom.

It isn't that I ignored the questions I did get around to answering them, it's just that I was trying to catch up and read three cases at the same time. So I was ignoring the questions until after the lynch. Also I want it to be clear I wouldn't have joined a CFD even if one was around since I will very very rarely join or help start a CFD.

Regarding sig at the end of Day 2:

I am not bothered by his initial decision to vote for Boomslang despite having been underwhelmed by the case. At the time of sig's arrival in the thread, there were about 20 minutes left in the phase and three wagons formed -- Boomslang, DrWilgy, and A Person. If I enter the thread under the same conditions and feel underwhelmed about all three wagons, there's a good chance I'd still pick one of them.

Note: it was sig's first appearance on Day 2. He had too little time to be able to catch up with the game, which means he had too little time to be able to provide any preferable alternative to those three names. To me, the meaning of his vote is reliant more upon the alignments of the other two (and we know Wilgy was town). The best argument then, in my opinion, to criticize sig's decision is to suggest that he was trying to save A Person -- something that hinges upon an unknown alignment, and something that is inherently challenged by his next move:

actully never mind on that Boom vote just yet, I just realized that would tie them.

In the end when he did vote Boomslang, it was because he preferred that vote over a Wilgy vote (Wilgy's wagon is the one that had taken off late) -- given Wilgy's flip, I don't think that's a problem.

I didn't want to tie it without looking into it more, after reading up on it and then MP's actions made me vote Boom. In hindsight MPs actions weren't that bad, but at that time my view was bias since he was grilling me. :P

Sigurd. Sigmurd Freud. Sig Newton.

Sigourney Weaver?

Who? I think I'm to young to know these fossils.

sig's true identity is Zuul, Gatekeeper of Gozer.

But I do know this reference.

Again regarding sig:

I discussed here why I wasn't bothered by his conduct at the end of Day 2. I am inclined to temper my own mindset here though, because this rationale is better suited as "why something is not scummy" instead of "why something looks civilian", and the difference is important. I want reads, Sigurd. Sigmurd Freud. Sig Newton.

Reads will come soonish


linki: Thanks Golden only seven more semesters to go until i can start my plot of world domination.

[triceratopzeuhl]

it also has occurred to me that we have two killing groups, the mafia and the SK. I don't think from the night 1 kill we can tell who performed that action and since one player submits the kill for mafia it could be that the kill submitter was absent. Or we could have had an afk SK, which A person would fit into. However, there is no hard evidence the kill didn't happen, it could have easily been blocked or the player who was targeted could have been protected so I don't think that is avenue worth pursing at this time.

It's much more likely that night 1 kill was mafia because the serial killer's role says something needs to happen to activate his kill

Alfothad will be alerted and start killing when [Secrets]

and also because I seriously doubt the mafia would miss all of their night kills so far this game, especially since the most absent player of this game did 50% of his votes during night 1 (so he was obviously around)

[triceratopzeuhl]

50% of his posts**

[triceratopzeuhl]

My personal belief, and it seems most likely, is that
1. night 1 kill was from Moya
2. night 2 kill(s?) was/were blocked by rockets fall or static or other powers

[Marmot]

Spoiler: show

[sig]

I'll be addressing Timmers two posts on me soon right now a few quick reads from what I've skimmed without doing ISOs.

A person is a slight scum read, since he isn't contributing much. I'm gut reading him as the SK though and not mafia.
Golden looks good, I don't think scum! Golden would have defended me when I was absent. (unless my tinfoil theory is right)
MP is a slight civ read, he seems to be seriously trying to help the civs, but scum MP is pretty good at seeming like that to. I'd say for him as well as the other high posters if none of them die and none lead us to get a mafia member we need to look at them closely. Now the dying part is a little tricky since we have a third party who can kill and maybe civs, so that strategy won't work as well here.
Timmer is a slight civ even though he is wrong about me
bwt I'm gut reading as bad
I notice I was suspicious of Scotty and I can't recall why so I'm going to ISO him
MM I disliked his votes, but his day 3 content seems better.


I plan to over the weekend ISO everyone right now I'll be ISOing a few key players.

Wow Duh Sig, Guess I should have read that and not just skimmed. This means the kill isn't active and the mafia team kills every other phase which seems wacky or the mafia was active N1 not N2. A person was active N1 and if the player needs to submit the kill it could be him. However I always cringe at these types of theories and targeting lurkers since it is always kind off a stab in the dark, especially with so many secrets.

Quick ISO of A person

Thanks G.

As far as low posters go, A Person has only posted twice, but I must preface that I dot tag on low posters for not posting frequently, but for not posting quality posts.

Over 1000 posts before Day 2. Way to go, team.

Would you believe me if I told you I wouldn't mind the mafia and/or serial killer killing all the high posters so the rest of us can keep up?

same tbh

This is his 4th of 4 posts. It was last night. It tells me he doesn't want to read the thread, and he doesn't really care what's going on. Civ behavior? I think not.

I don't have the time or energy to read all the nonsense people spew, a few well placed kills would improve the quality of the game.

Maybe this is why I'm gut reading A person as SK?

I'm pretty sure I've played with him before, I want to say Star Wars but not 100% sure, and while AP was a low poster he was present and giving some amount of context. So we have three posts N1 then nothing until Day 3. I could vote here.


Dom

I had a very early ping of Dom due to these two posts.

Actually MP, your post count has already jumped to an obscene place. I'm not sure I've seen it quite like this since you started Transistor with 57 posts before the second-highest poster made it to #8.

You over-eager cuz you bad, m8?

i got a cherry tree out back
wanna pick some more?

Actually MP, your post count has already jumped to an obscene place. I'm not sure I've seen it quite like this since you started Transistor with 57 posts before the second-highest poster made it to #8.

You over-eager cuz you bad, m8?

i got a cherry tree out back
wanna pick some more?

It's a cherry pick if MP dominates the early post count this much in every game, and I don't think he does. Indeed other than Transistor I might say the other most applicable comparison is to the Scrimmage (I can't remember his precise post count comparatively; I just remember it being very high very early). It doesn't make him bad, but it's worth throwing some poop.

you're right. it's certainly a load of crap.

This was mostly a gut ping, but I also found it odd he was defending MP here.

Who hasn't checked in yet? A Person, Lorab, Ninjuukyuwhatever, anybody else? (sorry if you did and I just missed your post)

I did so check in!! I was the first to post!!!!! I just haven't had anything to add since then.

That said...and this is probably a stupid question (and I'll probably get flack for it, but whatever). But, uh, are we supposed to be doing anything? There's no poll, but is there any sort of day 0 exercise that I missed? Do we know how we get to day 1 (or night 1, depending on which comes first)?

Hunting for mafia fellow townies. That's what we're supposed to be doing.

But seriously, no Day 0 poll or anything, just check in time... I believe.

How do other people feel about that line?
I don't feel great about it.

Now I missed this before, but I find it interesting.

He dislikes this for some reason, I don't see why, but it's a gut read so I'll accept it. However, he was just defending MP then he turned and started suspecting him? This happened rather quickly. Dom also seemed to have dropped his suspicion of MP and JJJ very quickly which makes it seem disingenuous to me.

i think he's purposefully exposing how flawed poe is

MP stated earlier that he isn't using PoE anymore. So what makes you think he is still doing it?

i'm talking about epi

MP, you never answered my question directed at you earlier.

and you never answered mine

jay-- i'll bite.
*votes wilgy*

wait, so here in my ISO of DOm I became very confused, unless I missed something he went from accusing 3J of cherrypicking to voting with him on Wilgy for no reason? I've also noted up to voting for Wilgy he never engaged him once so this was a really out there vote. I don't like this vote or the way he seems to be agreeing with 3J

I don't feel very good about Dom at all after my ISO, he doesn't have a large amount of content, but from what I've seen it isn't very good. This is still in part a gut read, but also a read based on his interactions with 3J, MP, and his vote for Wilgy. Altogether it makes very little sense.

[triceratopzeuhl]

Here's the complete list of players who posted during night 1 but not night 2:

A Person
scotty

A Person, Epignosis and Lorab missed the night 2 poll (though Lorab posted once and Epignosis posted 7 times). Scotty voted in it.

So in the possible situation that Alfothad's kill isn't activated yet and Moya was absent rather than getting blocked, then A Person is the only player who didn't show up in any way during night 2

However not seeing any insanified posters I'm pretty sure rockets fall must have used his power

linki mm - right, noted, there would have to be more than 1 block anyway I think

[triceratopzeuhl]

I'm pretty sure I've played with him before, I want to say Star Wars but not 100% sure, and while AP was a low poster he was present and giving some amount of context. So we have three posts N1 then nothing until Day 3. I could vote here.

Somebody linked all his past games here and they all have at least some attempt at playing mafia in them

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Marmot, what are you thinking of doing with your vote at the moment?

[Marmot]

Everybody is playing really well right now. Unfortunately, that means mafia is winning.

Linki: I don't know honestly.

[Golden]

Everybody is playing really well right now. Unfortunately, that means mafia is winning.

Linki: I don't know honestly.

That's how I feel. And the few that aren't really playing so well (eg, A Person), probably aren't bad and we are probably lynching them just because everyone is playing so well.

Just a note to everyone. I'm having some internet issues, so if I suddenly vanish and aren't around near end of day, that's why.

[sig]

So I'll start with a few quick fire thoughts on Lorab.
I don't see her enthusiasm then lack of content early on is odd.
I don't think it was scummy for her to say she wouldn't have voted for INH, it didn't give her any civ credit what so ever, so I fail to see why a mafia Lorab would do this.
I dislike how much she focused on insaifiers

I'm like 5 pages behind. Trying to catch up. Just wanted to let y'all know that I'm still here.

Hi, LoRab!

Curious to hear what thoughts you have when you get caught up.

Hi! For now at least, I'm skipping those 5 pages. I don't have the time or energy to go back--so if anything happened I need to know about, someone please let me know!!

I don't have much to say. The day 0/1 conversation has been interesting, but I'm not sure I have any conclusions from it. At least not strong ones. I think i'm still wrapping my brain around the game.

I can connect with this, I didn't get many reads from the early conversation so it isn't scummy.

Thanks G.

As far as low posters go, A Person has only posted twice, but I must preface that I dot tag on low posters for not posting frequently, but for not posting quality posts.

Over 1000 posts before Day 2. Way to go, team.

Would you believe me if I told you I wouldn't mind the mafia and/or serial killer killing all the high posters so the rest of us can keep up?

same tbh

This is his 4th of 4 posts. It was last night. It tells me he doesn't want to read the thread, and he doesn't really care what's going on. Civ behavior? I think not.

I don't have the time or energy to read all the nonsense people spew, a few well placed kills would improve the quality of the game.

This may be the least civie friendly thinking I've read in mafia. Either you're a civ who is saying that vocal players who are actively discussing the game should be killed (which isn't good for the civ cause) and are telling the mafia to kill active civs. Or you're mafia and doing the same thing. Also, if you're mafia, that was a phenomenally ironic kill.

But, please, can you explain a possible civ justification for this post? Because it's not making sense to me from a civ perspective.

I agree with her here as well, it also is a good reason to justify her day 2 and 3 votes. Having said that voting A person twice in a row seems like an easy way out of dealing with the other wagons. So this post and her vote ends up being null.

How many damned insaifiers we got in this game? If you count Epi's weird Swedish message he's done a few times, that's 3.

Too many secrets for my liking.

Also, I'm voting LoRab.

I know she hasn't been on my radar at all and I definitely haven't been talking about her, but I took a step back and want it to be known that I'm voting her.

LoRab

Ima take that as forced vote.

And It was Icelandic--in response to an earlier joke with I can't remember who. I originally thought it was a response to Vomp's death, but Google Translate told me the language, so I checked back. Also, only 1 post. So, not likely insanified.

Who is the third?

I can also see the logic in this post from Lorab's end.

For what it's worth, I think MP is civ.

I also think he should take a deep breath and come back to the game.

I'm voting A Person. At least for now. If they come back and give a reason for their post advocating for killing high posters, then I may reconsider.

Can you elaborate on your MP read?

final thoughts, like I said above she talks about the insaifiers and possible alignment a good amount which I dislike, since this allows her to post and seem involved and active, but not post real context that could cast suspicion on her.
Her vote for A Person looked okay at first, but I could also see the reasoning for her vote to be done if she was bad. It is an easy scapegoat/low hanging reason to vote for someone. At the same time what A person said was really odd and he hasn't defended his statement. Not even a "It was a joke guys lol" type post.


SO I'm really conflicted about Lorab, I don't find the INH thing mafiaish which Sloonie seemed to think was bad, but I don't like some of her context, and am completely torn on her Aperson vote.

@Lorab could you give me a few other reads? Like top 2 civs and baddies and reasoning for the reads.

The main issue I'm having with an A person vote is it could an easy scapegoat for mafia, but I think eventually we will need to resolve this issue and it might be better to lynch him earlier then wait. I need to think on that.

I would review MM, but he has like 100+ posts and I need to grab dinner so I will be back in a bit if the players around could share their views of Dom and Lorab's vote on A Person I'd appreciate it.

[sig]

Also quick note before I go one of the top posters (JJJ, Sloonie, Golden, and MP) is most likely bad, I just have no clue which one it is. :P

[Marmot]

None of my reads are strong ones (the mafia ones anyway). I see two reasons to vote AP. 1) To off a quiet player and hope we get the right flip. 2) Self-preservation (though I don't feel in particular danger of being lynched). But those are countered by a good point from Epignosis, in that AP would have tried to nightkill a loud player if he was mafia. Also, Vompatti is the last player I'd expect AP to support killing.

My Golden read isn't very strong. My main goal is to try to poke and prod in the hopes of stirring up some activity because of the fact that so many people are feeling pretty ambivalent on their reads.


What else is good? Who should I look at?

[Golden]

Also quick note before I go one of the top posters (JJJ, Sloonie, Golden, and MP) is most likely bad, I just have no clue which one it is. :P

Ok those who are not me, I would say that MP is least likely, sloonei is most likely. Jay in the middle.

[Marmot]

I would review MM, but he has like 100+ posts and I need to grab dinner so I will be back in a bit if the players around could share their views of Dom and Lorab's vote on A Person I'd appreciate it.

My posts aren't terribly long though. :P I just post a lot of them.

[Golden]

I do not believe MP would have Vompatti in a rainbow list after knowing he had killed him, especially one made hurriedly when he was going out the door (far less likely to do it deliberately).

[Tangrowth]

I'm here, but admittedly concentrating more of my attention on Lost Again because I've been like 90% focused here and 10% focused there since that game started.

[Tangrowth]

MP, when you get back, I'd like you to elaborate on your Vompatti read

MP is strong town for me. That's almost what I'd call a derpclear.

Oh wow, I'm an idiot.

Obviously I didn't mean to leave him in there.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I decided to check my data compilation to see if I could assess trends among the lowest contributory tier of players in Syndicate Mafia games, as a way of qualifying any assumptions about A Person in this game. He has made 6 posts and we're about to complete the 3rd day phase. If he doesn't post again through the night, that'd be 2 posts per cycle. This is a statistic I have tracked for nearly every game played so far in 2016.

Alignment counts for players who have finished a game at or below 2 posts per cycle this year:

Good -- 11

Bad -- 9

Independent -- 5

This is a count of 25 players in the games I have tracked (17 or 18) whose rate of contribution has been comparable to A Person's so far in this game. 44% of them were purely good and 36% of them were purely bad. The indies can be judged as a gray area since their win conditions vary so much. This ratio is a lot closer than it would be if non-contributor alignments were arranged at random in accordance with typical starting rations between good and bad. In that regard, it means people who play like A Person is playing have been baddies more often than randomness would indicate -- suggesting lynching him wouldn't entirely be a guess.

The sample size isn't large enough to make a concrete assertion and stamp it into Mafia law, but it's enough to make me reconsider my prior statement that baddies don't want to let their team mates down by giving nothing to the game. There's clearly a precedent for that.

[Tangrowth]

I even looked at that list for like 10 minutes before posting it and didn't notice that.

[Marmot]

Also quick note before I go one of the top posters (JJJ, Sloonie, Golden, and MP) is most likely bad, I just have no clue which one it is. :P

Ok those who are not me, I would say that MP is least likely, sloonei is most likely. Jay in the middle.

Sig makes a good point. If we look at this from a probability standpoint, there's a pretty good chance that one of you is mafia. This is historically accurate.

[Tangrowth]

I don't really care if I get lynched. I've done what I can.

I find your indifference hard to believe.

[Marmot]

I don't really care if I get lynched. I've done what I can.

I find your indifference hard to believe.

Ok fine. I want to be lynched.

[Tangrowth]

I'm not really liking the state of this lynch. It seems like the majority of the people with votes (AP, MM, Lorab) are primarily being voted for being goofy, unhelpful or not their usual game style.

One other thing I'm noticing is that every time in this game A Person starts getting votes, along come other sort of sudden, weak lynch trains on easy targets.

If no one is willing ti bite on my Dom thoughts, and of course they weren't airtight, I'll move my vote to AP, for now. I don't get a bad feeling from Lorab yet. MM could be bad, so I'm not going to defend him, but in the end, the way AP keeps surviving these early lynch trains against him is making my gut get the feels.

AP for me.

I felt pretty convinced regarding your observations re: Dom, sorry I didn't call it out specifically (I wanted to), but I got rushed off and had to go quickly. It should be evident though by my placement of him on the rainbow list. I wouldn't oppose a Dom lynch today.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I have around 15 minutes left in this thread. For the moment I don't feel the inspiration to move my vote. The most important problem with LoRab's content isn't that she has been pressed for time, it's that she hasn't used that time to promote much of a hunting effort. She's asserted that she will play her own way and I am supportive of that, but I also don't know what that means in this game so far other than answering to accusations.

I welcome inspiration from those of you promoting other wagons.

[Tangrowth]

Yes but the seems to be a move again. Ap has contributed nothing to the game. MM has contributed in a goofy way that hasn't been very effective.

If ap is at 3 votes and mm at 0, why suddenky go for him when ther is no way to say that ap is more worthy to see sick around.

It's a word time to start creating an almost tie.

I feel some of MM's content is suspect. There's no content to judge with AP. That's the difference.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I am not inclined to mount resistance to an A Person lynch. The numbers I just pulled at least make it appear better than a roll of the dice if those numbers have any value.

Marmot voters: could you summarize your most significant beefs very briefly?

[nijuukyugou]

timmer: the timing thing. Right now, it's the scummiest thing I've seen.

nijuu: her Day 2 vote. She voted Scotty because other people were talking about him, not because she read him as bad.
MP: He claimed that my accusation against timmer based on timing is historically inaccurate, but could not come up with an example (these two things don't go together)
sig: Similar to nijuu, his Day 2 vote.

Ninja suspicion - factually incorrect

Trice: Seems like Epi vote was a placeholder at first, but morphed into a "real" vote (as in, one that stuck) after responding to people's questioning the train. I see his reasoning (Epi's lack of on-topic posts, frustration at the song gimmick, etc.) although I disagree with it. Appears like a genuine vote (I wanted to be more eloquent, but I'm running out of steam after a long day).

Wilgy: Errrrrr...why are people saying Scotty's vote is the most suspicious on this train? I get that Wilgy's a nut, but Wilgy offers literally no reasoning for his vote except #lynchepi. So, yeah, that first question is a genuine question. Answer it.

Scotty: From reading his posts on Days 0 and 1 (according to the headings), it appeared like he would vote one of his "gut-baddie" reads (JJJ, Sloonei, actually votes BWT as a changeable vote), but votes Epi. I see that he said vote "something that matters," which I assume is a vote somewhere that already had votes, and he didn't go with INH because...well, actually, I'm not sure why, more than Epi. Gave a bit of a vouch as far as INH's content, but said it could've been suspicious by trying to look good? Anyway, his Epi vote, as others have said, is pretty weird. However, he is helping insanified Golden currently, which looks helpful and civ to me, barring weirdness behind the scenes.

So, I suppose what I get from that is Trice's vote looks the most genuine, Wilgy's absolute nonsense (not helpful), and Scotty's disingenuous. Discuss.

MP suspicion - daft. I came up with an example immediately (LC hounding me about what I did in 17 minutes in Bullets Over Broadway). Why does MP need to come up with a different one? Especially when your Timmer suspicion is the most contrived thing that this game has seen (and is my primary reason for suspecting you) - you completely ignored everything else timmer had said and done.

Sig suspicion - apparently 'similar to ninja', but the ninja suspicion was wrong, and how similar was it?

It just felt like you pulled three names taking a little heat out of the air and said whatever you could think of.

Yeah, gonna have to agree with this real hard. You've been suspecting me (and others, but I of course notice attention on me more than anything, cheesecake ) all game, yet fail to produce viable evidence for the majority, and then post a "suspicion" that's blatantly false info. I was going to respond to it until I noticed Golden did the work for me.

I'll be hanging around a bit, but I'm putting my vote on MM right now.

[Tangrowth]

At quick glance of sig's content today, I'm feeling better about him.

[Tangrowth]

Also quick note before I go one of the top posters (JJJ, Sloonie, Golden, and MP) is most likely bad, I just have no clue which one it is. :P

Well, it's obviously not me.

I'd say, from most to least likely:
1. JJJ
2. Sloonei










3. Golden

[Tangrowth]

I do not believe MP would have Vompatti in a rainbow list after knowing he had killed him, especially one made hurriedly when he was going out the door (far less likely to do it deliberately).

Well, you'd be right there. I still feel badly about derping like that though.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I am not feeling a significant degree of tinfoil about MP, Sloonei, or Golden.

[Marmot]

Ooooooh. This lynch is getting very interesting. I like it!

[Tangrowth]

I decided to check my data compilation to see if I could assess trends among the lowest contributory tier of players in Syndicate Mafia games, as a way of qualifying any assumptions about A Person in this game. He has made 6 posts and we're about to complete the 3rd day phase. If he doesn't post again through the night, that'd be 2 posts per cycle. This is a statistic I have tracked for nearly every game played so far in 2016.

Alignment counts for players who have finished a game at or below 2 posts per cycle this year:

Good -- 11

Bad -- 9

Independent -- 5

This is a count of 25 players in the games I have tracked (17 or 18) whose rate of contribution has been comparable to A Person's so far in this game. 44% of them were purely good and 36% of them were purely bad. The indies can be judged as a gray area since their win conditions vary so much. This ratio is a lot closer than it would be if non-contributor alignments were arranged at random in accordance with typical starting rations between good and bad. In that regard, it means people who play like A Person is playing have been baddies more often than randomness would indicate -- suggesting lynching him wouldn't entirely be a guess.

The sample size isn't large enough to make a concrete assertion and stamp it into Mafia law, but it's enough to make me reconsider my prior statement that baddies don't want to let their team mates down by giving nothing to the game. There's clearly a precedent for that.

This is compelling. It also vies with the theory that mafia members are likely to be lower posters, in general, because they have to manufacture all of their content, and may be more likely to sit back while town picks itself apart.

I may be turning around to being OK with an AP lynch. I'm not really opposed with it anyway. I just hate these 'blind' lynches, because I feel like they are essentially coin flips, and they're irritating especially when we have content by which to judge everyone else.

[Tangrowth]

Also quick note before I go one of the top posters (JJJ, Sloonie, Golden, and MP) is most likely bad, I just have no clue which one it is. :P

Ok those who are not me, I would say that MP is least likely, sloonei is most likely. Jay in the middle.

Sig makes a good point. If we look at this from a probability standpoint, there's a pretty good chance that one of you is mafia. This is historically accurate.

I promise you I will do some proper research regarding "timing" suspicions, whether it's during or after this game. I just know I've played many games where those kinds of suspicions were lodged and they were always incorrect, from my recollection anyway.

[Golden]

Marmot voters: could you summarize your most significant beefs very briefly?

He reminds me of Dune marmot. Nominally contributing 'real reads' but it feels more like a smokescreen of playing out what Marmot is expected to do, and it feels like he isn't really reading the thread.

Plus, he made that case against me which had significant flaws but he never showed any indication that he was interested in considering or acknowledging that there could be flaws.

[Tangrowth]

I don't really care if I get lynched. I've done what I can.

I find your indifference hard to believe.

Ok fine. I want to be lynched.

Why would you want that?

[Tangrowth]

I have around 15 minutes left in this thread. For the moment I don't feel the inspiration to move my vote. The most important problem with LoRab's content isn't that she has been pressed for time, it's that she hasn't used that time to promote much of a hunting effort. She's asserted that she will play her own way and I am supportive of that, but I also don't know what that means in this game so far other than answering to accusations.

I welcome inspiration from those of you promoting other wagons.

I can dig it. I just don't feel any conviction for it. You could say that my thoughts re: LoRab are pretty congruent with what timmer had to say on the matter.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Marmot thoughts at a glance:

~ I haven't been thrilled with some of his lines of attack
>>> the timmer/Boomslang timing thing
>>> MP's failure to provide examples that timing-based suspicions don't typically work
>>> Boomslang's timmer vote

~ To my memory, a few of his votes have chased chic suspects of the moment before being moved frivolously, which might suggest a lack of real investment.

~ I do think he has put forth a better effort than he typically would by Day 3, and he hasn't seemed to struggle to engage dialogue in real time.

[nijuukyugou]

I decided to check my data compilation to see if I could assess trends among the lowest contributory tier of players in Syndicate Mafia games, as a way of qualifying any assumptions about A Person in this game. He has made 6 posts and we're about to complete the 3rd day phase. If he doesn't post again through the night, that'd be 2 posts per cycle. This is a statistic I have tracked for nearly every game played so far in 2016.

Alignment counts for players who have finished a game at or below 2 posts per cycle this year:

Good -- 11

Bad -- 9

Independent -- 5

This is a count of 25 players in the games I have tracked (17 or 18) whose rate of contribution has been comparable to A Person's so far in this game. 44% of them were purely good and 36% of them were purely bad. The indies can be judged as a gray area since their win conditions vary so much. This ratio is a lot closer than it would be if non-contributor alignments were arranged at random in accordance with typical starting rations between good and bad. In that regard, it means people who play like A Person is playing have been baddies more often than randomness would indicate -- suggesting lynching him wouldn't entirely be a guess.

The sample size isn't large enough to make a concrete assertion and stamp it into Mafia law, but it's enough to make me reconsider my prior statement that baddies don't want to let their team mates down by giving nothing to the game. There's clearly a precedent for that.

Good or bad, dude, I just want to applaud this science That's dedication.

[Tangrowth]

I am not inclined to mount resistance to an A Person lynch. The numbers I just pulled at least make it appear better than a roll of the dice if those numbers have any value.

Marmot voters: could you summarize your most significant beefs very briefly?

I agree with wherever it was that Golden said that his suspicions are bunk and he's misrepresenting people in his accusations. I also am really bothered by his continued suspicion of me for calling upon my own experience in not finding any value in timing-based assertions. I feel he really doesn't care to make fair assessments regarding players in this game on their content in this game to judge who is town and mafia.

I don't feel very strongly about it, but I definitely have beefs.

[Tangrowth]

I am not feeling a significant degree of tinfoil about MP, Sloonei, or Golden.

Why? That seems unlike town!JJJ.

[Tangrowth]

Marmot voters: could you summarize your most significant beefs very briefly?

He reminds me of Dune marmot. Nominally contributing 'real reads' but it feels more like a smokescreen of playing out what Marmot is expected to do, and it feels like he isn't really reading the thread.

Plus, he made that case against me which had significant flaws but he never showed any indication that he was interested in considering or acknowledging that there could be flaws.

I strongly agree with this.

[Tangrowth]

I decided to check my data compilation to see if I could assess trends among the lowest contributory tier of players in Syndicate Mafia games, as a way of qualifying any assumptions about A Person in this game. He has made 6 posts and we're about to complete the 3rd day phase. If he doesn't post again through the night, that'd be 2 posts per cycle. This is a statistic I have tracked for nearly every game played so far in 2016.

Alignment counts for players who have finished a game at or below 2 posts per cycle this year:

Good -- 11

Bad -- 9

Independent -- 5

This is a count of 25 players in the games I have tracked (17 or 18) whose rate of contribution has been comparable to A Person's so far in this game. 44% of them were purely good and 36% of them were purely bad. The indies can be judged as a gray area since their win conditions vary so much. This ratio is a lot closer than it would be if non-contributor alignments were arranged at random in accordance with typical starting rations between good and bad. In that regard, it means people who play like A Person is playing have been baddies more often than randomness would indicate -- suggesting lynching him wouldn't entirely be a guess.

The sample size isn't large enough to make a concrete assertion and stamp it into Mafia law, but it's enough to make me reconsider my prior statement that baddies don't want to let their team mates down by giving nothing to the game. There's clearly a precedent for that.

Good or bad, dude, I just want to applaud this science That's dedication.

Agreed.

[Tangrowth]

Well, I have to go again now. We're having company tonight (DFaraday!) and I have things to do to prepare for that and more PhD stuff. Leaving my vote on MM, though I wouldn't strongly oppose an AP lynch; I just would rather he be replaced frankly.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

I am not feeling a significant degree of tinfoil about MP, Sloonei, or Golden.

Why? That seems unlike town!JJJ.

The baddies killed Vompatti. Do you think anyone in the high poster group goes for that? I also don't think Sloonei likely pursued a self-silence on the second day, and I am fine with his content. I don't think Golden pursued a self-insanification on the second day, and I am fine with his content. I think you played Day 1 as balls out as you could, and I doubt you lost your shit as a ruse. That would have been straight up bad gamesmanship.

Tinfoil is circumstantial, not inherently necessary.

[JaggedJimmyJay]

Good or bad, dude, I just want to applaud this science That's dedication.

Agreed.

It's rewarding when people appreciate my work.